This weeks topic may be a little controversial as I am about to take a firm stand on an issue which often divides wildlife lovers. On the one side we find the preservationists, those like John Muir and the Sierra Club, who believe wildlife and nature should be left alone. Then on the other side you find conservationists, like the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and myself, who believe in a hands-on approach to wildlife management. This approach is the main method used by wildlife agencies around the world and involves the concept of sustainable use: this being ecotourism activities, the biggest of which is hunting/fishing.

The truth is, the original conservation movement was started by hunters. Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th president of this great nation, was an avid hunter and naturalist. During his term as President he created a little over 50 wildlife refuges in America including Pelican Island in Florida and Tongass in Alaska (PBS). He was also a founding member of the Boone and Crockett Club as well as a member of the New York Zoological Society which is now known as the Wildlife Conservation Society.

However there is one other great American hero of conservation that may out shine even Roosevelt. Jay Norwood “Ding” Darling, was an avid conservationist, hunter, and political cartoonists (one of which is posted below this paragraph). In 1934 he was asked by Franklin D. Roosevelt, as an effort to stifle his criticism of FDR’s administration, to head the U.S. Biological Survey, which would one day become the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Ding). One of his biggest actions as such was the hosting of a massive meeting of conservationists, firearms manufacturers, and hunters. Out of this great meeting came conservation landmarks such as the duck stamp and the Pittman Robertson Act. These two actions are essentially self imposed taxes on hunters and hunting equipment set aside to pay for conservation efforts. These two pieces of legislation can very well take credit for the amazing restoration of North America’s wildlife and wildlife habitat.

Outside of the U.S. we find this same phenomena of hunters being the root of conservation. No other place is this more evident than in Africa. Like North America hunters were originally the bad guys. By 1900 unrestricted hunting had already caused the extinction of two species: the blue buck, Hippotragus leucophæus, and the quagga, Equus quagga quagga. However, just like in the U.S. hunters were the first to realize the damage they were causing and changed their ways. Many hunters, ranchers and conservationists started converting land from agriculture to wildlife and worked to create national reserves such as the Kruger National Park. Now in Africa the mentality is “if it pays it stays”. While this may not be as altruistic as the North American version of conservation it is effective none the less.

Currently wildlife and hunting can bring large sums of money to otherwise poor areas as well as a constant flow of red meat. As can be seen in the picture below nothing goes to waste. This provides incentive for both land owners and local people to tolerate wild animals and the damage they can do to crops and property, as well as livestock predation from carnivores. In Sub-Saharan Africa the major trend for wildlife species has been increases in numbers. This is due in large part to the massive trophy hunting industry since as I stated before the trophy hunting industry provides monetary incentives to tolerate wildlife as well as providing funds to pay for anti-poaching efforts. However, as an alternative the country of Kenya closed to hunting in the mid ’70s and his since then seen drastic decreases in its wildlife populations. Probably the biggest contributor to this decline is rampant poaching and a lack of anti-poaching efforts.

It is thanks to conservation minded hunters that we all enjoy the amazing abundance of wildlife which we have today. If not for them there would not have been enough funding or motivation to protect our treasured wildlife or to protect and restore habitat. This has been a very general overview of the topic however you can trust that over the next couple of weeks I will dive deeper into this subject.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

It’s just my opinion …
I tend to feel sports hunter wildlife conservation no longer exists in our 21st Century America. I will give credit to Roosevelt, Muir for the original premise of conservation but then again, I cannot seem to forget about 1st Nation People. I grew up eating venison, hearing hunting stories, but my father and his circle seemed to have hunted in the right way. I do not believe what we have these days, in my opinion; can be considered sports hunting or conservation, its legal poaching. I have asked questions, along with others, here in the NW demanded, they stop ELK kills about to happen due to a damaged golf course built on not only Elk territory but also tribal lands without being told and their response was even more chilling. In other cases, the department of fish and wildlife has volunteer and hired hands to round up elk for kills, this is just wrong. The notion of wildlife conservation is out of control here in the US of A.

I believe if folks would just take a closer look into what is happening, most will find new housing developments and big corporations are the real issue shrinking wildlife habitat.

Nativegrl77. First I would like to thank you for your comment. Although we do not agree with each other on modern hunting I still felt compelled to approve your post to be displayed here. I do not want to stifle differing opinions, in fact I welcome them, however yours is one of the first that kept things civil. I would say that I do agree with you that human encroachment is the biggest threat to wildlife as we continue to shrink their remaining habitat. This encroachment often leads to overpopulations and animals “invading” our space, although it was rightfully theirs to begin with, and eventually actions are taken to remove them.

As for modern hunters I can say that the sense of ethics in hunting is still alive and well today. As an avid hunter I personally live by this creed and have met countless others who still feel this way as well. That is not to say that there are not a few bad eggs amongst hunters as in any other demographic. I have met a few people who hunt simply because they get a rush from shedding blood. The person I have in mind also fancies himself to be some sort of MMA fighter, to give you a better idea of this guys mental state. However the majority of hunters I have met, men and women alike, truly love wildlife and live by a code of ethics in their hunting. In the USA, Canada, and I across Africa I have had the pleasure of meeting hunters and conservationists that absolutely love their wildlife. Many of us are just as happy hunting with a camera as we are with a bow or rifle. When we do harvest an animal always the quickest, cleanest, and most humane kills are strived for. And only the best trophies, the old boys, are taken. My PH and I passed on what could have been a record kudu because he was still young and in his prime. Instead we settled on a much smaller, although still impressive, bull that was well beyond his breeding prime.

So no, the sense of ethics is not dead. Management practices have certainly changed as we continue to spread more and more into what used to be wild country. But this is no fault of the local game department s or the hunters. We are simply trying to conserve our precious wildlife as best we can while big business and an expanding human population continually demand more space for housing, shopping, industry, etc….